The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No.

1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94

An investigation of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the role of

Tax Amnesty in tax compliance
Agnes Findia Novianti1, Nurul Hasanah Uswati Dewi2
1, 2 STIE Perbanas Surabaya, Nginden Semolo Street 34-36, Surabaya, 60118, East Java, Indonesia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history: The individual taxpayers’ low awareness has become the main problem of developing
Received 3 April 2017 countries in tax aspect. Thus, this study aimed to examine the determinant factors of
Revised 10 May 2017 tax noncompliance using Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior as a theoretical
Accepted 24 May 2017 framework. Specifically, Tax Amnesty is added to the theory’s constructs: attitude,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Tax Amnesty is expected to be a
JEL Classification: moderating influence. The population of this study is individual taxpayer in KPP
M48 Pratama Sukomanunggal. Based on convenience sampling method, the number of
sample in this study are 145 samples. The data was analyzed using Structural Equa-
Key words: tion Modeling (SEM) with SmartPLS.3.0 and SPSS 21. The results indicated that
Taxpayers’ Awareness, first, attitude and subjective norms are significantly influence behavioral intention
Tax Noncompliance, except perceived behavioral control. Second, the model including Tax Amnesty pro-
Tax Amnesty, and vides a significant influence of tax noncompliance in two constructs; attitude and
Theory of Planned Behavior. subjective norms. However, the interaction effect of perceived behavioral control does
not appear significantly.
DOI:
10.14414/tiar.v7i1.961 ABSTRAK
Rendahnya kesadaran pembayar pajak individu telah menjadi masalah utama negara
berkembang dalam aspek pajak. Dengan demikian, penelitian ini bertujuan untuk
menguji faktor penentu ketidakpatuhan pajak dengan menggunakan Ajzen's (1991)
Theory of Planned Behavior sebagai kerangka teoritis. Secara khusus, Amnesti Pajak
ditambahkan pada konstruksi teori: sikap, norma subjektif, dan kontrol perilaku yang
dirasakan. Amnesti pajak diharapkan bisa menjadi pengaruh moderat. Populasi dalam
penelitian ini adalah wajib pajak individu di KPP Pratama Sukomanunggal. Berda-
sarkan metode convenience sampling, jumlah sampel dalam penelitian ini adalah 145
sampel. Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
dengan SmartPLS.3.0 dan SPSS 21. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa pertama, sikap
dan norma subjektif berpengaruh signifikan terhadap niat perilaku kecuali pengenda-
lian perilaku yang dirasakan. Kedua, model termasuk Amnesti Pajak memberikan
pengaruh yang signifikan terhadap ketidakpatuhan pajak dalam dua konstruk; sikap
dan norma subjektif. Namun, efek interaksi kontrol perilaku yang dirasakan tidak
tampak secara signifikan.

1. INTRODUCTION collected by Indonesia government

Indonesia is categorized as a country, which has a
low tax ratio level. In 2014, Indonesia tax ratio
compared to its gross domestic product approx-
imately 12.8% and then, 2015 decreased to 12.32%.
When compared with other countries, Indonesia
tax ratio remains below even with Philippines is
14%, Malaysia is 16% and Singapore is 22%. Hav-
ing low tax ratio level, indicating low tax revenue
(www.kemenkeu.go.id 2016).
Tax revenue is the main revenue for covering
the government expenditures. Thus, the govern-
ment always does some great efforts to increase tax
revenue by increasing the tax compliance. Various
programs were implemented by the government to
raise the awareness in paying taxes. The Directorate
General of Taxation had issued Sunset Policy pro-

* Corresponding author, email address: 1 agnesfindia1@gmail.com, 2 nurul@perbanas.ac.id.

79

gram in 2008, the year of Tax Amnesty in 2014, and
the recently program is Tax Amnesty policy.
Sunset Policy is regulated by Act 28 year 2007,
conformity with article 37 of statutes, which stand
for the existence of Sunset Policy. Actually, Sunset
Policy is not a new program as Sunset Policy con-
sidered the lowest Tax Amnesty, which was im-
plemented in 1984. Sunset Policy is a program of
sanction amnesty for the taxpayers who report
their income honestly and pay the rest of the tax
before 21st March 2009. If taxpayers used this
program, they would get two benefits. Firstly,
they got reduction or removal of administrative
sanction such as interest of annual tax return be-
fore the end of 2007. Secondly, reduction or re-
moval of administrative sanction for unpaid tax
and lower tax payment either organizational or
individual. This is also open for the individual
taxpayers who register themselves voluntarily to
have taxpayer‟s identity.
After the expiration of Sunset Policy, the level
of tax compliance did not seem to increase. Besides,
the lower tax revenue collection is from Individual
taxpayers.
Actually, corporation has a better compliance
than individual taxpayers
(http://ekonomi.metrotvnews.com). It is proved by
revenue from tax sector which never reached the
target which set by the government since 2009 until
2015. In conclusion, the potential long-run revenue
gains from Sunset Policy are relatively small. The
comparison between target and realization of tax
revenue is illustrated by chart presented in Figure 1.
The next implemented program was the year
of amnesty for taxpayer in 2015, hopefully it would
increase public awareness to pay taxes and to re-
port their annual tax return correctly. The year of
amnesty for taxpayer is a chance from government
before implementing Tax Amnesty in 2016, which
had many advantages; incentives gave to all kind of
taxes, taxpayers who did not report amount tax
correctly and report tax. Beside, the taxpayers who
were late to report the tax in 2015 would not be
fined or pay the rest of tax. If the taxpayer increas-
es, the revenue from tax will increase. Surprisingly,
in 2015 tax ratio decreased from 11.32% to around
11% from the previous year. So, the year of amnes-
ty for taxpayer program did not success enough
(http://www.tribunnews.com 2016).
Low of public awareness to pay tax reduces tax
compliance and it has become the main problem of
the state from tax aspect. Commonly, small accep-
tance to pay tax voluntary happens in developing
countries, including Indonesia, it seems not only is
80
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
encouraged by the low of ratio level of taxpayer
and the number of people but also other dominant
factors such as the high number of tax avoidance
practices, institutional trust, capacity to implement,
tax evasion, administration complexity, tax com-
pliance, and tax morality.
It was found by Bobek et al. (2007) that social
norm mostly influences taxpayers to fulfill their
debt. It is also supported by Wenzel (2004) that
personal ethics which is based on religion and cul-
tural norm may have impact on the free tax com-
pliance behavior of the fiscal exchange between
taxpayers and government. Theoretically, factor
have been identified in tax compliance tax knowing
as Theory of Planned Behavior developed by Ajzen
(1991) which extend the attitude, social norm, and
perceived behavioral control create a person‟s in-
tention to perform or not to perform and behavior
is the most important factors immediately determi-
nant of personal action.
Some previous study done by Bobek and Hat-
field (2003) examined the noncompliance of tax-
payers by using Theory of Planned Behavior, which
is developed by Ajzen (1991). In their‟ research
framework, tax compliance was formed by three
factors; they are the attitude toward the behavior,
subjective norms, and perceived control by adding
moral obligation as a moderating variable. The re-
sults were attitude toward compliance and subjec-
tive norms affected behavioral intention.
Similar result was also reported in Bobek et al.
(2007). On occupation the study of Elia (2007)
proved that not only attitude, subjective norms,
and perceived behavioral control influenced on tax
compliance but also financial, facilities, and organi-
zation environment. However, the inconsistency of
findings on the relationship between compliance
and some of its determinant (Widi and Argo 2010),
they failed to prove all assertion. Koch et al. (2015)
reported that attitude might make less compliant,
otherwise it significantly related to compliance af-
ter moderating by financial condition. Wenzel
(2004) offered an analysis of norm process in tax
compliance, which social norm referred to the per-
ceived injunctive norms seemed to reduce tax com-
pliance and no longer significant influence.
According to Ajzen (2005: 42) there are three
broad categories of factors that interact with atti-
tudes or personality traits. They are situational cir-
cumstances surrounding performance of the beha-
vior, characteristic of the individual and secondary
characteristics of the disposition. Situational factor
is the different condition in some situation but con-
sistent with each other such as regulation and poli-
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
Target and Realisation of Tax Revenue since 2009 until 2015
1600
1400
1200
Revenues
1000
800
600
400
200
0
2009 2010
Source: Tax council website, processed.
Difference of Target and Realization of Tax Revenue since 2009 until 2015
Source: Ajzen (1991).
Theory of Planned Behavior Construct
cy. Hence, Tax Amnesty as one of recently fiscal
policy of government can classified as situational
factors, which may moderate tax noncompliance,
and its determinant factors.
Based on the inconsistency result of previous
study and phenomenon, the researcher is going to
examine noncompliant behavior toward taxpayers.
In this present study extends this prior tax com-
pliance research in two ways. First, this study use
factor determinants of noncompliance as suggested
by Theory of Planned Behavior. Second, it focus on
situational factors, Tax Amnesty, as moderation
variable will interact with construct toward beha-
vior intention; specific behavior (attitudes), social
pressures an individual feels to perform (subjective
norms), the amount of control an individual per-
ceived to engage in that behavior (perceived beha-
vior control).
in Billions
Target
Realisation
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Years
Figure 1
Figure 2
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPO-
THESIS
Theory Planned of Behavior
Theory of Planned Behavior is formulated in 1991 by
Icek Ajzen. This theory suggests that a person‟s
behavior is determined by intention to perform the
behavior. Intentions are a function of three basic
determinants; one reflecting personal nature, one
social in nature, and a third dealing with issues of
control (Ajzen 2005: 117). All subject‟s interaction
are defined as well as Figure 2.
First, personal factor is the individual‟s atti-
tude toward the behavior. This attitude is the indi-
vidual‟s positive or negative evaluation of the par-
ticular behavior. Attitude is representation of per-
sonal norms, as actualization of self based stan-
dards or expectation for behavior that flow from
internalized values (Bobek et al. 2007).
81

Attitudes are predispositions to respond favor-
ably or unfavorably to an object, group, places, do
something in certain condition. Attitude is a per-
son‟s feeling or way of thinking that affects a per-
son‟s behavior.
Moreover, individual‟s attitudes are represen-
tation of their belief that underlying the outcome.
That is expectation to achieve some benefits by en-
gaging in their behavioral intention. Attitude comes
from their feelings that define the behavior. So,
attitude in this study represents how the taxpayers
thinking and expect to after fulfilling their tax lia-
bilities.
The second determinant of intention is social in
nature. Social in nature is person‟s perception of
social pressure to perform or not perform the beha-
vior under the consideration. Social in nature deals
with perceived normative prescription, this factor is
termed subjective norms. Subjective norms are a
reference from other peoples that influence some-
one to do something (Ajzen 1991). Subjective norms
refer to a person‟s belief about individual or groups
approve or disapprove that will motivated taxpay-
ers to behave compliant.
According to Bobek et al. (2007) subjective
norm is representation of individual‟s perception of
the injunctive norms held by “referent” others such
as family, friends, and co-workers. Taxpayers‟ be-
liefs appear from their compliance reference from
surrounding such as groups, family members, em-
ployers, friends, and spouse.
Third, the determinant of intention is control
represents the sense of self-efficacy or ability to
perform or not perform the behavior. This factor is
termed with perceived behavioral control. This control
is more likely to personal deficiencies and external
obstacles can interfere with performance the beha-
vior.
Finally, all the determinant factors; attitude
toward behavior, subjective norms, perceived be-
havioral control interact each other predict inten-
tion. Then, the intention will translate into action.
Explanation about how Theory of Planned Behavior
frames this research discussed in the next discus-
sion.
Tax Compliance
Taxpayers have high contribution to manage their
tax responsibilities accurately. Taxpayers should
count, pay and report their tax by themselves, so
tax compliance awareness is needed. Tax com-
pliance can be defined as a condition that taxpayers
fulfill all their tax liabilities Siti (2016: 38).
According to Siti (2016: 110) there are two
82
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
kinds of tax compliance; formal compliance and
material compliance. Formal compliance is a tax-
payer‟s compliance fulfils their liabilities based on
tax law formally. Materiel compliance is a taxpay-
er‟s condition fulfils all their tax liabilities substan-
tively based on the content of tax law. Materiel
compliance also includes formal compliance, so
doing formal compliance does not represent mate-
riel compliance.
Internal revenue Service defines the formal
compliance in three conditions. They are filling
compliance, payment compliance, and reporting
compliance. These Criteria based on regulation
198/PMK.03/2013 refer to KEP-213/PJ/2003.
Based on regulation 198/PMK.03/2013 taxpayer‟s
compliance is explained as filling accurate and
complete annual tax return before the due date, the
rightness of periodic tax report, paying of all tax
debt (taxpayers never get notice of tax collection),
not having tax arrears except it is permitted by tax
officer to pay in installment, never commit a tax
criminality at least for 5 years.
Tax Amnesty
Based on UU RI 17 year 2016, Tax Amnesty is an
elimination of a tax liability relating to a previous
tax period or periods. It will free charge from inter-
est and criminal prosecution including administra-
tive or punishment if they inform both taxpayer‟s
liabilities and assets. Every taxpayers may get the
forgiveness by disclose their asset. The type of am-
nesty is forgiveness for tax liability until the end of
fiscal year. In exchange for forgiveness, taxpayers
must pay redemption voluntarily.
There are some purposes of Tax Amnesty. First,
it is for accelerating the economic growth and eco-
nomic restructuring by property transferring. That
will impact on increasing of domestic liquidity,
improved exchange rate, lower interest rate and
increased investment. Second, it is for encouraging
tax reformation; equitable tax system, extended
data basis it make data more valid, comprehensive,
and integrated. Finally, the main aim of Tax Amnes-
ty is for increasing tax revenue.
Theoretical Framework
The main purpose of this research is to predict tax
noncompliance using Theory of Planned Behavior
model and examine whether the Tax Amnesty will
interact with the TPB construct or not. According
the objective of the research, in this study, there
will be three steps.
First, test the influence of attitude toward non-
compliance, subjective norms, and perceived beha-
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
ANC
SNM
BIT
PBC
Tax
Amnest
y
Source: Ajzen (2005), Fatih (2011), processed.
Figure 3
Theoretical Framework
vioral control on noncompliant intention. Second is
analyzing the effect of noncompliant intention tax
noncompliance. Third is examining the moderation
effect tax between Tax Amnesty and the constructs
of Theory of Planned Behavior. Graphically, the theo-
retical framework is shown in Figure 3 (see the va-
riables identification).
The previous theoretical framework shows
how every variable will have interaction each other.
Based on the previous study and theoretical
framework, below are the hypotheses of study.
The Influence of Attitude toward noncompliance
to Intention
Attitudes are predispositions to respond favorably
or unfavorably to behave noncompliance. Attitude
is a person‟s feeling or way of thinking that affects
a person‟s behavior. Attitude comes from their in-
ternalized values. Various studies have demon-
strated the role of personal norms for taxpaying
behavior. That was done by Bobek and Hatfield
(2003) and Elia (2007) that attitude toward non-
compliance was significantly influent behavioral
intention. The other side Widi and Argo (2010)
proved that attitude toward noncompliance did not
affect behavioral intention. Based on this considera-
tion, the hypothesis is formulated as follow:
H1: Attitude toward noncompliance significantly
influence to noncompliant behavioral intention.
The Influence of Subjective Norms to Intention
In many condition, taxpayers behavioral is influ-
ence by other peoples. The decision of taxpayer to
behave to behave compliance or non compliance is
motivated by referent people. The previous study
showed that subjective norms had high influence to
83
TNB
noncompliant intention (Bobek and Hatfield 2003;
Widi and Argo 2010; Elia 2007). In other hand, Widi
and Bambang (2012) did not support the influence
of subjective norms and noncompliant intention.
Based on this consideration, the hypothesis is for-
mulated as follow:
H2: Subjective norm significantly influence to non-
compliant behavioral intention.
The Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to
Intention
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) is outcomes of
control belief. Control belief lead to the perception
taxpayers have or do not have capacity to carry out
the behavior. PBC refer to taxpayer‟s belief about
the presence or absence of factors which facilitate
or impede noncompliance.
The higher control toward taxpayers, noncom-
pliance may decrease. Empirically, the relation be-
tween perceived behavioral control and noncom-
pliant behavioral is proven. But two previous stu-
dies oppose the influence of perceived behavioral
control and noncompliant behavioral (Bobek and
Hatfield 2003; Widi and Argo 2010). Based on this
consideration, the hypothesis is formulated as fol-
low:
H3: Perceived behavioral control significantly influ-
ence to noncompliant behavioral intention.
The Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to
Noncompliance
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) is outcomes of
control belief. Control belief lead to the perception
taxpayers have or do not have capacity to carry out
the behavior. PBC refer to taxpayer‟s belief about
the presence or absence of factors which facilitate

or impede noncompliance. The higher control to-
ward taxpayers, noncompliance may decrease.
Empirically, the relation between perceived
behavioral control and noncompliant behavioral is
proven. But two previous studies oppose the influ-
ence of perceived behavioral control and noncom-
pliant behavioral (Bobek and Hatfield 2003; Widi
and Argo 2010). Based on this consideration, the
hypothesis is formulated as follow:
H4: Perceived behavioral control significantly influ-
ence to noncompliant behavior.
The Influence of Intention to Noncompliance
Intention connects the tax noncompliance and its
factors determinant. Generally, intention signifi-
cantly influences tax noncompliance. Based on Aj-
zen (2005: 101) intention can accurately predict a
variety of corresponding action tendencies.
Empirically, Intention is proven related to tax
noncompliance (Bobek and Hatfield 2003; Widi and
Bambang 2015; Elia 2007). Based on this considera-
tion, the hypothesis is formulated as follow:
H5: Tax noncompliant intention significantly influ-
ence to noncompliance
The Influence of Tax Amnesty to Theory of
Planned Behavior constructs
Tax amnesty as compliance driver will increase
taxpayer‟s compliance. Previous studies found that
tax amnesty had great impact on compliance. Ad-
vocates of amnesties argue that successful amnes-
ties were accompanied by increased enforcement
following the amnesties James et al. (1990).
Generally, there are factor of various kinds can
influence intention, but this influence is usually
moderated by more specific condition. An obvious
potential moderating variable relate to behavioral
context is situational constraint. Hopefully, Tax
Amnesty as a recent fiscal policy can moderate the
attitude and personal trait. If an amnesty is accom-
panied by these features, then simple model of
noncompliance will decrease.
Based on this consideration, the hypothesis is
formulated as follow:
H6: Tax amnesty moderates relationship between
attitude and noncompliance.
H7: Tax amnesty moderates relationship between
subjective norms and noncompliance.
H8: Tax amnesty moderates relationship between
perceived behavioral control and noncompliance.
3. RESEARCH METHOD
Population, Sample, and Sampling Technique
Population is a large collection of individuals or
84
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
object that is the main focus of study. Population of
this research is individual taxpayers in KPP Prata-
ma Sukomanunggal. It is located in Bukit Darmo
Golf No.1 Surabaya. To generate the population,
sample is needed. Sample is a group of subjects or
participants from whom data are collected. Sample
of this research is expectantly more than 100 Indi-
vidual taxpayers who come to tax office and volun-
tarily want to become respondents.
The method for choosing the subject is Conven-
ience Sampling. Convenience sampling is one of non
probability sampling method which subjects are
selected. Besides, Convenience Sampling is availabili-
ty or ease to access. Using Convenience Sampling,
sample is more objective, valid, and reliable. Con-
venience Sampling usually represents the popula-
tion, easy to analyze and interpret the result, give
generalization possible to similar object Millan
(2008: 118).
Data Collection Procedures
Related with the research questions on the back-
ground of the study, the data collection procedure
is self-administered survey that primary data are col-
lected by survey to respondents for collecting indi-
vidual taxpayer‟s opinion Jogiyanto (2012: 140).
Taxpayers will give the opinion based on the ques-
tionnaire instruction. Then, qquestionnaire is
handed out to individual taxpayers who come to
tax administration office in KPP Pratama Sukoma-
nunggal. Researcher waits for the taxpayers to fill
in the questionnaire and collects the questionnaire
directly.
Variables Identification
This research model uses latent variables which
cannot measure directly but use indicators which
influence taxpayer‟s intention to behave non com-
pliance; (1) attitude toward non compliant behavior
(ANC), (2) subjective norms (SNM), (3) perceived
behavioral control (PBC), (3) behavioral intention
(BIT), (4) Tax Amnesty (TAY), (5) tax noncompliant
behavior (TNB).
Independent variables (X) are attitude toward
non compliant behavior, subjective norms, per-
ceived behavioral control. Dependent Variable (Y)
is tax noncompliant behavior. Intervening Variable
is behavioral intention. Moderating Variable is Tax
Amnesty
Operational Definition and Variables Measure-
ment
In this research, behavioral variables use Theory of
Planned Behavior (TPB). All variables classify as la-
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
tent variables. Latent variables are variables which
not directly observed but inferred from other va-
riables that are observed, Latent variable is meas-
ured using indicators called manifest variables
Byrne (2010: 4). Moreover, this study needs taxpay-
ers to give their opinion, so the research‟s instru-
ment is questionnaire and the respondent‟s should
answer the questionnaire as well as interview tran-
script.
Type of the questionnaire is interval and nu-
merical scale by giving score; 1 until 7 in every
statement. The respondents must give suitable
score for each item between 1 until 7. The informa-
tion of scale‟s representation is explained below:
Scale 1: Strongly disagree
Scale 2: Disagree
Scale 3: Approximately disagree
Scale 4: Neutral
Scale 5: Approximately agree
Scale 6: Agree
Scale 7: Strongly agree
Tax Noncompliant Behavior
Noncompliant Behavior of Individual taxpayers are
noncompliance of individual taxpayers who do not
obey the tax liabilities. Noncompliant behavior as
latent variable is measured by IRS‟s definition of
tax compliance replicated by study of Brown and
Mazur (2003). Every item is elaborated which refer
to definition of formal compliance which regulated
by 198/PMK.03/2013.
The tax compliance can be measured indirectly
using indicators which consist of 7 items. They are
never get fine for late reporting periodic tax return,
late reporting annual tax return, never get fine for
underpayment tax, never commit a tax criminality,
never correct the fiscal more than 10%, feel guilty
while doing tax fraudulent, and thinking that doing
noncompliance is not unethical actions. The res-
pondents must give suitable score for each item
between 1 until 7.
Intention to Tax Noncompliance
Intention is a planning of someone to perform or
not perform a specific behavior it is immediately
determinant of their action. So, Intention represents
taxpayers willing to pay tax, to comply all their tax
liabilities. Measurement of intention to noncom-
pliant behavior as latent variable uses respondent‟s
opinion replicate Mustikasari (2007).
There are two postulates which represent in-
tention variable‟s indicators; (1) preference and (2)
decision to comply or do not comply tax regulation.
The respondents must give suitable score for each
85
item between 1 until 7.
Tax Amnesty
Tax Amnesty is an elimination of a tax liability relat-
ing to a previous tax period or periods. It will free
charge from interest and criminal prosecution in-
cluding administrative or punishment by informing
both taxpayer‟s liabilities and assets. In exchange
for forgiveness taxpayers must pay a defined
amount voluntarily.
There are 7 indicators to measure Tax Amnesty
refer to James (2009). The questions include desire
to take opportunity, considering its benefits, know-
ing the certain tax liabilities, good reference from
others, sufficient facilities to take amnesty, and tax
officer‟s guidance. The respondents must give suit-
able score for each item between 1 until 7.
Attitude toward Noncompliance
The attitude toward noncompliance is determined
by the taxpayer‟s evaluation of outcomes of asso-
ciated with noncompliance behavior and belief
strength of these associations. According to Ajzen
(2005: 124) Estimation of the attitude toward non-
compliance is based on the person‟s accessible be-
liefs about noncompliance by multiplying belief
strength and outcome evaluation, and summing the
resulting products. Attitudes are algebraically
modeled as follows:
AB= a ∑ biei. (1)
Where:
AB = the attitude toward B;
bi = the subjective probability that performing be-
havior B will lead to outcome i;
ei = the evaluation of outcome i.
The measurement of attitude toward behavior
is used 7-point scales which replicated Elia (2007).
To measure belief strength and evaluate the out-
come, respondent should decide rate of expectancy
in every indicator. They are the willingness to pay
less tax, allowance for tax investigating fund, feel-
ing a loss upon tax system, the perception of tax
benefit is not transparent, and the higher bribery
cost than economical tax. The respondents must
give suitable score for each item between 1 until 7.
Subjective Norms
Normative beliefs are the beliefs that underlie sub-
jective norms. Normative beliefs refer to people
whom motivate, give taxpayers social pressure to
comply and the most referents to perform com-
pliance or non compliance. Subjective norms can be
assessed by asking respondent to judge how likely
it is that most people who are important to them

would support their behavior. Symbolically, Sub-
jective norm is express in equation below:
SN= a ∑ nimi. (2)
Where:
SN = the subjective norm;
ni = normative beliefs concerning referent i;
mi = the person‟s motivation to comply with refe-
rent i.
The measurement of subjective norm is used 7-
point scales which replicated Elia (2007) by 4 indi-
cators to measure this subjective norm. The indica-
tors measure the most reference people while fulfill
taxpayer‟s liabilities such as friends, family mem-
bers, tax consultant, and tax officers. The respon-
dents must give suitable score for each item be-
tween 1 until 7.
Perceived Behavioral Control
Perceived behavioral control becomes a function
belief. That is beliefs about the presence or absence
of factors that facilitate or obstruct performance
compliance or non compliance. Beliefs about re-
sources and opportunities to comply on don not
comply may be as underlying perceived behavioral
control. It can be measured directly by asking tax-
payers whether they believe that they are capable
of performing compliance non compliance and
whether they believe that doing so is under other‟s
control. The relation between control belief and
perceived behavioral control in symbolic form are
showed below:
PBC = ∑cipi. (3)
Where:
PBC = perceived behavior control
ci = control belief that a given factor i;
pi = the power of factor i to facilitate or inhibit per-
formance of the behavior.
Perceived behavioral control is measured with
3 indicator replicated Elia (2007). They are the pos-
sibility of having tax audit by tax authorities, the
possibility of getting tax penalties, and the possibil-
ity of third-party reporting. The respondents must
give suitable score for each item from 1 to 7.
Data Analysis Technique
This research use statistic technique in analyzing
the variables. The data were processed by using
SPSS 20.0 and SmartPLS 2.0. The analysis process is
described as the following.
Descriptive analysis
Descriptive statistic includes the mean, variance,
maximum, minimum, sum, range, and percentage.
Cross tabulation is also used to understand com-
86
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
prehensively about the respondent‟s profile. This
technique is especially used to overview the extent
of tax noncompliance and its determinant‟s. This
descriptive analysis is analyzed by SPSS 20.0.
Structural Equation Modeling
Structural Equation Modeling is applied to answer
the hypothesis. SEM-PLS specifically uses
SmartPLS 2.0. Besides it, to describe the data and
research subject, SPSS 20.0 is used.
There are four steps to analysis PLS-SEM;
1. Defining Theoretical Model
Structural equation model is based on causal rela-
tionship which assumed that every change of vari-
able will effect to other variable. Causal relation-
ship is strong based on theoretical justification not
because analysis method which used in the re-
search. So, the most important of structural equa-
tion model must be parsimony with concise theo-
retical model.
2. Developing The Overall Measurement Model
(Outer Model)
The second step is measuring path analysis and its
structural equation. Path analysis is a set relation-
ship between exogenous, endogens variables and
manifest. Outer Model defines how each block of
indicators relates to its latent variables. Quality of a
measurement model (outer model) can be checked
by validity and reliability. Validity test is assessed
by examining convergent validity and discriminant
validity while reliability test is assessed through
composite reliability (Chin 2014: 316). The validity
and reliability test had been explained in the validi-
ty and reliability test point.
3. Assessing Structural Model Identification (In-
ner Model)
Evaluation of PLS models should apply nonpara-
metric prediction-oriented instrument. To that ex-
tent, (1) the R-square is used for dependent latent
variables, (2) Stone-Geisser is tested for predictive
relevance, and (3) t-statistic is used to assess the
significance of constructs.
R-square has criterion; the model is good if R2
score is 0.67, moderate if R2 score is 0.33, and weak
if R2 score is 0.19 (Imam Ghozali 2011: 42). Besides
looking at R-square as a criterion for predictive
value, F-square can also be used to evaluate struc-
tural model in PLS. F-square determines the effect
size of latent variables. F-square value indicates
how big the power of latent variable is influenced
in structural level. The power of latent variable is
“big” if F2 is 0.35, moderate if F2 is 0.15, and weak
if F2 is 0.02.
4. Interpretation and Model Modification
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94

Table 1
Respondent’s Profile
Informal Became
Profile Gender Age Formal Education
Education Taxpayers
Highest number Male (77) 36-45 (37.9%) Bachelor degree (53.8%) Seminar (26.2%) 11-20 (40.7%)
Lowest number Female (66) ≤ 26 (1.4%) Doctoral Degree (2.8%) Brevet (5.5%) >30 (5.5%)
Source: SPSS Output, developed by Author.

Table 2
Respondent’s Opinion
Tax Non Subjective Tax
Questions Intention Attitude PBC
compliance Norms Amnesty
Highest Doing Decide to not Feeling a loss Family The possibility of Tax
number noncompliance comply with tax upon tax members getting tax officer‟s
is unethical regulation system penalties guidance
actions
Lowest Never correct Incline to do tax The perception Tax Officers The possibility of Knowing
number the fiscal more noncompliance of tax benefit is having tax audit the certain
than 10% not transparent by tax authorities tax
liabilities
Source: Processed by Excel.

After model is accepted, the researcher may con-
sider modifying the model. The purposed of im-
provement the model is to repair theories explana-
tion or goodness-of-fit. The measurement is done
by modifying indices score.
To answer whether the hypothesis is sup-
ported or not, it should compare t-value and signi-
ficance of parameter, which is 5%. For the regres-
sion result, the hypothesis is supported or signifi-
cant if it has t-statistic more than 1.96, but if t-
statistic is less than 1.96, the hypothesis is not sup-
ported or not significant.
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
The Questionnaire submission is more than one
month, which started from 31th October 2016 until
2nd December 2016. In this research, there were 150
questionnaires delivered to respondents. The entire
questionnaire came back but there are 5 incomplete
questionnaires. Incomplete questionnaire is out of
sample because the respondents did not fill com-
pletely and give their opinion clearly. Therefore,
only 145 questionnaires could be analyzed. Hence,
the Respondents are divided into 4 categories. They
are age, gender, formal and informal education,
and the length of time became taxpayers. Table 1
explained shortly how the demographic of research
subject.
Research Subject Based on Age
Looking on the age of taxpayers, the smallest num-
ber of respondents are at the age of 26, which are
only 2 respondent or 1.4%. This taxpayer does not
realize that they have done noncompliance. The
highest numbers are 27 to 35 years old, which are
71 respondent or 49% in which 36 respondents are
male and 35 respondent are female. In this age,
taxpayers begin to look for the way to do noncom-
pliance and think how they can pay smaller tax.
Table 1 demonstrates that the male respon-
dents are higher than female respondents. It means
that male is more noncompliant than female. Some
research supports that female is complier than fe-
male. David et al. (1994) defines female has a dif-
ferent attitude through ethic and ethic code. The
maturity also decreases noncompliance.
After taxpayers are 27 years old, the percen-
tage of noncompliance decreases gradually. Kohl-
berg model defines moral maturity influence some-
one in decision making, whether they do favoura-
ble or unfavourable action, indeed noncompliance.
Research Subject Based on Education
There are two kinds of educations, they are formal
and informal. Data respondents based on formal
and. Formal education consists of doctoral degree,
master degree, bachelor degree, and senior high
school. Informal education is divided into 5 catego-
ries. They are brevet, course, training, seminar, and
others.
Looking on the formal education as Table 1,
the most noncompliant are bachelor degree, which
are 53.8% or 78 respondents in which male respon-
dents are 46 and female respondents are 31. Indi-
vidual taxpayers who have passed bachelor degree
and they are between 27 until 35 years old are the
highest numbers on doing noncompliance, which is
28.3%.

87
 Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …

Table 3
Model Evaluation
Cropnbach’ R-Square R-Square
Latent Variables AVE CR
Alpha before Moderating after Moderating
Attitude 0.923 0.960 0.917
Subjective Norms 0.983 0.938 0.931
Perceived Behavioral Control 0.562 0.708 0.754
Tax Amnesty 0.877 0.942 0.714
Behavioral Intention 0.522 0.684 0.805 0.362 0.400
Tax Noncompliance 0.613 0.864 0.795 0.014 0.014
Source: PLS Output, developed by Author.

Table 4
Hypothesis Analysis
No. Coefficient t-statistic t-table Noted
1. ANC BIT 0.072 3.708 1.96 Significant
2. SNM BIT -0.204 1.978 1.96 Significant
3. PBC BIT -0.155 1.746 1.96 Not Significant
4. PBC TNB -0.018 0.832 1.96 Not significant
5. BIT TNB 0.118 1.966 1.96 Significant
6. AT_TAY  BIT 0.070 4. 688 1.96 Significant
7. SNM_TAY  BIT -0.204 4.492 1.96 Significant
8. PBC_TAY  BIT -0.065 0.727 1.96 Not significant
Source: PLS Output, developed by Author.

Moreover, on the informal education, training as follow:

is the highest numbers of respondent‟s informal
education that they had joined. They are 74 res-
pondents or 51%, which 43 respondents are male
and 31 respondents are female. Brevet is the smal-
lest numbers of respondent‟s informal education
which are 8 respondents or 5.5% in which male
respondents are male and 7 respondents are female.
The higher level of education should decrease
noncompliance. On the contrary, the phenomena
shows bachelor degree has highest number on
doing noncompliance. Thus proves that having
high education does not guarantee taxpayers will
more comply.
Research Subject Based on Length of Time to be
taxpayers
Refers to Table 1, the highest numbers are between
11 to 20 years became taxpayers which are 40.7% or
59 respondents in which 37 respondents are male
and 22 respondents are male. On the other hand,
the smallest one is more than 30 years old, which
are only 8 respondents or 5.5%. This can be con-
cluded that the higher age will decrease non-
compliance because the taxpayers have known how
to fulfil their tax liabilities both administrative or
payment process.
Next step is counting the mean and analyzing
the opinion of respondents and the result is shown
Based on the questions relate to tax non-
compliance, individual taxpayers disagree doing
noncompliance is unethical actions. They think that
doing noncompliance is ethical actions because it
does not bring a loss to government directly. Fraud
triangle defines doing noncompliance while think-
ing its noncompliance is not unethical action is ca-
tegorized as rationalization. So, even though the
taxpayers did not admit their tax noncompliance,
they cannot avoid the punishment.
Table 2 indicates individual taxpayers strongly
disagree if they did not correct the fiscal more than
10%. Taxpayers strongly agree they ever correct the
fiscal more than 10% and it becomes habit. They are
not afraid if they are investigated because tax low
in Indonesia provides some choice to be used in
calculation tax and
Seeing on taxpayer‟s intention, they very agree
when they do tax noncompliance, firstly they de-
cide to not comply with its tax regulation. Before
deciding, they will incline to do tax compliance
after deciding to not comply with tax regulation.
The reason why they don‟t comply is a feeling a
loss upon tax system, the influence of family mem-
bers to avoid tax liabilities, and arguing that tax
authorities will not audit taxpayers who have small
tax expense. Tax authorities prefer to audit corpo-
rate taxpayers than individual taxpayers. Besides,

88
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
taxpayers strongly agree that Tax Amnesty motivate
them to comply.
PLS Analysis
Model evaluation in PLS-SEM is a two-steps
process. First, evaluating the measurement model is
called outer model evaluation. Measurement model
is evaluated in the term of validity and reliability.
Second, examining the structural model, it is also
called inner model evaluation. Evaluation of inner
model can be assessed by examining the F-square
and coefficient determination (R2) Ravand and
Baghaei (2016).
Outer Model Evaluation
Outer Model defines how each block of indicators
relates to its latent variables. Quality of a measure-
ment model (outer model) can be identified
through validity and reliability test.
Validity test is assessed by examining conver-
gent validity and discriminant validity while relia-
bility test is assessed through composite reliability
(Chin 2014: 316). The outer model evaluation is
explained in Table 3.
Convergent validity should be fulfilled by
executing invalid variables must from model until
the entire factor loadings are above the acceptable
level of 0.50 and check the quality is through aver-
age variance extracted (AVE). All of the latent
variables have high average variance extracted
(AVE), which is more than 0.5. AVEs of 50% mean
that the construct explains at least half of the va-
riance of its observed variables. The highest AVE
is subjective norms, which 0.983. This indicates
that construct of subjective norms (indicators) is
able to explain 98.3% of the variance of the its ob-
served variables.
Reliability test in PLS-SEM can be assessed by
composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach‟s alpha.
According to the composite reliability of model
evaluation which it is explained in Table 4, coeffi-
cients of composite reliable are above 0.70, so all of
constructs are reliable. Then, all of the latent va-
riables have Cronbach alpha value more than 0.70,
so all variables are reliable. In conclusion, all of
latent variables have supported reliability and va-
lidity.
Inner Model Evaluation
Table 3 shows that R-Square for behavioral inten-
tion before including moderating effect is 0.362 and
R-Square for tax noncompliance is 0.014. It means
that firstly, the ability of independent variable‟s
indicators to explain (attitude, subjective norms,
89
perceived behavioral control, and Tax Amnesty)
behavioral intention is 36.2%. Then, 63.8% of beha-
vioral intention is influenced by others factors. It
also indicates that the structural model is “more
than moderate”.
Secondly, the ability of behavioral intention to
explain tax noncompliance is only 0.014 or 1.4%.
Moreover, 98.6% of tax noncompliance is explained
by others factors which is not included in this mod-
el.
The model seems to improve after adding the
moderating variable, which is Tax Amnesty. The
improvement is shown by the higher R-Square,
which is 0.400 or 40%.
To define whether the hypothesis is supported
or not based on t-statistic. If t-statistic score is more
than 1.96, it means that the hypothesis is supported.
If t-statistic score is less than 1.96, hypothesis is not
supported. In conclusion, the hypothesis 1, hy-
pothesis 2, hypothesis 5, hypothesis 6, and hy-
pothesis 7 are supported. Different results, hy-
pothesis 3, hypothesis 4, and hypothesis 8 do not
have significant effect.
The Influence of Attitude toward Noncompliance
to Behavioral Intention
Attitude toward noncompliance are predispositions
to respond favorably or unfavorably to behave tax
noncompliance. Attitude is also defined as a per-
son‟s feeling or way of thinking that affects taxpay-
er‟s noncompliance. Attitude is not built but it
comes from taxpayer‟s internal values. Theoretical-
ly, Ajzen (1991) claimed that attitude is an indica-
tion of noncompliance which elaborated in Theory
of Planned Behavior. According to Theory of Planned
Behavior, an attitude toward noncompliance is one
of determinant factor influencing behavioral inten-
tion which indirectly will affect to tax noncom-
pliance (Ajzen 1991). If the taxpayers have strong
attitude toward noncompliance, the intention to do
noncompliant behavior will be higher.
Based on the empirical result, Table 4, attitude
toward noncompliance is proven significantly in-
fluence to individual taxpayer‟s behavioral inten-
tion. Therefore this result of study is linear with
Theory of Planned Behavior which demonstrates atti-
tude toward noncompliance influences behavioral
intention. Then, behavioral intention directly influ-
ences tax noncompliance.
As the characteristic of tax, which is enforced
contribution and the purpose is for financing gov-
ernment operational expenditure, taxpayers will
look for the way to pay tax less than their liabilities.
Beside it refers to individual taxpayer‟s response

rate, when taxpayers fulfill their tax abilities they
will consider some factors. The factors that will be
considered is consist of feeling a loss upon tax sys-
tem, the willingness to pay less tax, the higher bri-
bery cost than economical tax, amount of allowance
for tax investigating fund, and taxpayer‟s percep-
tion of tax benefit is not transparent.
Five factors above as instruments to measure
attitude toward noncompliance. Factor, which has a
big effect to avoid tax abilities, is feeling a loss upon
tax system while factor which has a small effect to
avoid tax abilities is taxpayer‟s perception. Taxpay-
er precept tax revenue is not used transparently.
However this taxpayer‟s perceptions lead to per-
form tax evasion or noncompliance.
There is also evidence showing that attitude do
impact on taxpaying behavioral intention. In expe-
rimental study by Bobek and Hatfield (2003) to
predict noncompliance behavior in paying tax,
proved the sum of the attitude beliefs was always
highly significant. Even though, the significance of
the individual beliefs varied by scenario.
Furthermore, the finding seems consistent with
Widi and Bambang (2015) and Elia (2007) which tax
professional as a representative of corporate tax-
payer supported tax compliance as contribution to
government. The respondents agreed that attitude
influenced behavioral intention. Contrast with the
finding of Widi and Argo (2010) proved that atti-
tude did not significantly influence behavioral in-
tention.
The Influence of Subjective Norm to Behavioral
Intention
This research confirmed that subjective norms in-
fluence to behavioral intention. Based on individual
taxpayer‟s responses, they will consider advices of
family members, tax consultant, their friends, and
tax officers. The first reference people who will
influence individual taxpayers are family members.
Family member is the most confidential people.
Taxpayers have responsibility to fulfill their
need. Therefore, taxpayer will consider their advice
and family member‟s need to do noncompliance.
On the contrary, tax consultant is the last considera-
tion while individual taxpayers do noncompliance.
One reason for justification, not all of taxpayers
may have tax consultant. Theory of Planned Beha-
vioral proposes subjective norms may have effect to
behavioral intention.
Theoretically, subjective norm is one of indica-
tors of that influence behavioral intention which
indirectly influence tax noncompliance. Subjective
norms are a reference from other peoples that in-
90
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
fluence someone to do something (Ajzen 1991).
Subjective norms refer to person who will give mo-
tivation to decide noncompliance. In many condi-
tion, taxpayers behavioral is truly influenced by
other peoples.
Refers to Table 4, subjective norms are proven
significantly influence behavioral intention. There-
fore, this result of study is linear with Theory of
Planned Behavior which indicates subjective norms
influence behavioral intention. Then, behavioral
intention directly influences tax noncompliance.
Consistent with the result of Elia (2007), subjective
norms influenced behavioral intention to do non-
compliance.
In that research disclosed that tax profession-
al‟s recommendation had a high impact to corpo-
rate taxpayers to do noncompliance. Because of all
the amount of tax expense is calculated by tax pro-
fessional. The other study‟s result that supports this
finding is Bobek and Hatfield (2003). In contrast,
Bobek and Hatfield (2003) did not successfully
prove this expectation.
The Influence of Perceived Behavioral Control to
Behavioral Intention and Tax Noncompliance
Based on the result of Table 4 empirically, proved
perceived behavioral control does not influence
behavioral intention. Therefore, it can be concluded
that the third hypothesis and fourth hypothesis are
not significantly supported. As Table 4 shows, this
can happens because individual taxpayer is not
afraid of some factors. They are the possibility of
having tax audit by tax authorities, the possibility
of getting tax penalties, and the possibility of third-
party reporting. They only consider the advantages
of noncompliance.
This result of study is contrast with Theory of
Planned Behavior, which is claimed that perceived
behavioral intention influences behavioral intention
and tax noncompliance. Theoretically, perceived
behavioral control refers to degree of controlling
taxpayer‟s perception they have to involve in a par-
ticular compliant behavior. The higher perceived
behavioral control expectedly can decrease the be-
havioral intention to do noncompliance and in-
crease tax compliance, although it does not seem
effect the behavioral intention.
The prior studies also find that perceived be-
havioral control does not influence behavioral con-
trol (Widi and Argo 2010). Bobek and Hatfield
(2003) prove that perceived behavioral control does
not effect to behavioral intention but directly influ-
ence tax noncompliance. On the other hand, per-
ceived behavioral control is significant influence
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
both intention or tax noncompliance Widi and
Bambang (2015) and Elia (2007).
The Influence of Intention to Tax Noncompliance
Based on Table 4 empirically, proved that beha-
vioral intention has significantly influence to tax
noncompliance. Therefore, it can be concluded that
the fifth hypothesis is significantly supported. Be-
havioral intention of individual‟s taxpayer indicates
the inclination and decision to do tax non com-
pliance influence to tax compliance. Both of the
factors will lead individual taxpayer to do tax non
compliance.
Based on Table 4 demonstrates more than half
individual taxpayers decide to not comply with tax
regulation. Then, they rarely agree that they incline
to do noncompliance. This means that the beha-
vioral intention is higher to do noncompliance, tax
noncompliance will be higher. Hence, to decrease
tax noncompliance, behavioral intention should be
controlled using such regulation such penalties,
low rate, and others.
This result of study also supports Theory of
Planned Behavior which defines that person‟s beha-
vior is determined by intention to perform the be-
havior. Intentions are a function of three basic de-
terminants; one reflecting personal nature, one so-
cial in nature, and a third dealing with issues of
control.
All of the determinant factors is presented in
attitude toward behavior, subjective norms, per-
ceived behavioral control interact each other pre-
dict intention. Then, the intention will translate into
action (Ajzen 2005: 117). Nurul and Titik (2010)
intended to do something will increase the desire of
behavior. Mostly, there are some studies that also
prove there are significant influence between inten-
tion and behavior Widi and Bambang (2015); Widi
and Argo (2010); Elia (2007).
Discussion of Moderating Effect
According to Ajzen (2005: 42) there are three broad
categories of factors that interact with attitudes or
personality traits. They are situational circums-
tances surrounding performance of the behavior,
characteristic of the individual and secondary cha-
racteristics of the disposition.
First, situational factor is the different condi-
tion in some situation but consistent with each oth-
er such as regulation and policy. Hence, Tax Amnes-
ty as one of recently fiscal policy of government can
classified as situational factors which may mod-
erate tax noncompliance and its determinant fac-
tors.
91
Second, characteristic of the individual relates
with individual difference in various conditions.
Individual difference is considered as moderator is
based on the assumption that consistency may be
expected for some individuals but not for others
such as self-monitoring, private self-consciousness,
need for cognition.
Third, secondary characteristics of the disposi-
tion may influence the relationship between gener-
al attitude and specific behavior for example inter-
nal structure, reflection, accessibility, vested inter-
est, involvement, importance, confidence, direct
experience. So, theoretically, the most suitable
moderator between behavior and it determinant
factor is situational factor. Hopefully, Tax Amnesty
as compliance driver will increase taxpayer‟s com-
pliance.
Empirically, In this research Tax Amnesty is
tested whether succeeded or not influence tax non-
compliance. Tax Amnesty is measured by seven
points. They are good reference from other people,
the desire to take opportunity, consideration of its
benefits, knowing the certain tax abilities, good
reference from others, and the sufficient informa-
tion about Tax Amnesty, sufficient facilities, and tax
officer‟s guidance for following Tax Amnesty. Based
on descriptive statistic as Table 2 the highest factor
that gives big influence is good reference from oth-
ers and sufficient information about Tax Amnesty.
Based on hypothesis testing, Tax Amnesty em-
pirically can moderate the relationship between
attitude toward noncompliance and intention and
between subjective norms and behavioral intention.
By contrast, Tax Amnesty evidently cannot mod-
erate the relationship between perceived behavioral
control and intention. Consequently, there are 2
hypothesis is not supported which sixth hypothesis
and seven hypothesis. But, hypothesis 8 is sup-
ported. Thus, the result of study can support and
develop Theory of Planned Behavior.
Previous studies found that Tax Amnesty had
great impact on compliance. Advocates of amnes-
ties argue that successful amnesties were accompa-
nied by increased enforcement following the am-
nesties James et al. (1990). Actually, Tax Amnesty
will drive tax compliance higher but the long run
effect cannot be guaranteed Koch et al. (2015). The
previous study is done by James et al. (2009)
proved that Tax Amnesty had a high effect on reve-
nue but the effect is about five years after imple-
menting Tax Amnesty.
By this, it can be concluded that Tax Amnesty is
not the most suitable regulation to increase tax
compliance. After implementing Tax Amnesty, gov-

ernment may have program which can keep the
taxpayer‟s compliance.
5. CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, SUGGES-
TION, AND LIMITATIONS
This research purposes to examine noncompliant
behavior toward taxpayers using Theory of
Planned Behavior constructs. Besides that, this also
analyses the moderation effect of Tax Amnesty to
attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavior-
al control. These research objectives are applied to
the individual taxpayers by convenience sampling.
From the discussion in the last chapter.
Based on the research result, there is a signifi-
cant influence between attitudes toward tax non-
compliance and subjective norms to behavioral
intention. In contrast, perceived behavioral control
does not significantly influence behavioral inten-
tion.
This study empirically does not only test the
influence of perceived behavioral and behavioral
intention but also the influence of perceived beha-
vioral and tax non compliance. As the discussion
above, perceived behavioral control does not signif-
icantly influence tax noncompliance. Therefore,
perceived behavioral control does not significantly
influence both behavioral intention and tax non
compliance.
Empirically, behavioral intention is significant-
ly influence tax noncompliance. Hence, behavioral
intention can be the mediation between tax non-
compliance and its factor determinant.
According to the moderating effect analysis,
generally, Tax Amnesty moderates the relationship
Theory of Planned Behavior construct. Tax Amnes-
ty is proven can influence the relationship between
attitude toward non compliance, subjective norms
and behavioral intention. Nevertheless, the rela-
tionship between perceived behavioral control and
behavioral intention does not seem to have signifi-
cant relationship. As conclusion, all of the research
result supports Theory of Planned Behavior but
Tax Amnesty may not moderate its constructs.
However, this study is designed well; this
study is not free from limitation. This limitation of
study explains three important points cannot be
solved by the researcher. First, variables which are
used as determinant of tax noncompliance is only
utilized by Theory of Planned Behavior construct.
Even though, there are many variables can influ-
ence tax noncompliance. Consequently, the beha-
vior that taxpayers portray under this method may
not be a truthful representation of their actual be-
havior.
92
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
Second, in this study tries to improves the
model. Besides using Theory of Planned Behavior
construct adding Tax Amnesty as moderating va-
riables. Moreover, the model is categorized “weak”
and needs to be exercised deeply.
Third, Furthermore, the focus of this study is
on individual taxpayers. So, the result of study
cannot generalize with corporate taxpayers because
corporate taxpayers may have different opinions,
perception, and behavior from the individual tax-
payers.
Based on the result of and limitation of this
study, there are recommendations for government
and future researcher. For government, relates to
Tax Amnesty which recently implemented, as the
result of this research, this regulation may change
the taxpayer‟s behavior. However, the government
should provide sufficient facilities, clear informa-
tion and guidance.
The interesting one, Tax Amnesty not only
moderates the behavioral intention and its deter-
minants factor but also decrease tax noncompliance
directly. For future research is expected to conduct
several improvement by utilizing other or all types
of taxpayers in orders to get more comprehensive
result. Moreover, not only exercises the causality,
but also comparing taxpayer‟s behavior between
others country. Use this study limitation to im-
prove the future research. The next researcher is
expected to be able to explain comprehensively the
research problem.
REFERENCES
Ajzen, Icek, 2005, Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior,
Second Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Edu-
cation.
Ajzen, Icek, 1991, Theory of Planned Behavior, Orga-
nizational Behavior and Human Decission
Process, 50 (2).
Alabede, James O Ariffin, Zaimah and Idris, Kamil
Md. 2011, „The Moderating Effect of Financial
Condition on the Influencing Taxpayer‟s
Compliance Behavior in Nigeria‟, Journal of
Accounting, Finance, and Economics, Vol. 1(2),
pp. 42-53.
Anonym, 2016, „Tax Ratio 2015 Indonesia Lebih
Rendah Dibanding 2014‟, accessed from:
http://www.tribunnews.com/> [September
21, 2016].
Anonym, 2009, „Rendahnya Tax Ratio 2009‟, ac-
cessed from :<http://finansial.bisnis.com/
[September 21, 2016].
Anonym, 2015, „Gejolak Tax Revenue 5 Tahun Te-
rakhir‟, accessed
 The Indonesian Accounting Review Vol. 7, No. 1, January – June 2017, pages 79 – 94
from:<http://www.pajak.go.id/> [September
5, 2016].
Anonym, 2015, „Rendahnya Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak
Orang Pribadi‟, accessed
from:<http://ekonomi.metrotvnews.com/>
[September 21, 2016].
Anonym, 2016, „Peran Tax Amnesty di Indonesia‟,
accessed from:<http://www.pajak.go.id/>
[September 5, 2016].
Anonym.2014, „Berita Acara Dirjen Pajak Terkait
Tax Ratio‟, accessed from:
http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/ [September 4,
2016].
Asra, Abuzar and Prasetyo, Achmad, 2015, Pen-
gambilan Sampel, Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Barbara M Byrne, 2010, Structural Equation Model-
ling, II (2), 3-113.
Bintoro Wardiyanto, „Tax Amnesty Policy (The
Framework Perspective of Sunset Policy Im-
plementation Based on the Act no. 28 of 2007)‟,
Airlangga Press, 9 August 2016.
Bobek, Donna D and Hafield, Richard C 2003, „An
Investigation of The Theory of Planned Beha-
vior and the role of moral obligation in Tax
Compliance‟, Behavioral Research In Accounting,
Vol. 15, pp. 14-36.
Bobek, Donna D Roberts, Robin W and Sweeny,
John T 2007, „The Social Norms of Tax Com-
pliance: Evidence from Australia, Singapore,
and the United States‟, Journal of Business Eth-
ics.
Chin, Wynne, 2014, The partial Least Squares Ap-
proach to Structural Equation Modelling, Tenth
Edition, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso-
ciates.
David, JM and Greenberg, I 1994, „Possible Ethical
Issues and Their Impact on the Firm‟, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 13, pp. 919-937.
Dyan, Femka and Venusita, Lintang, 2013, „Analisis
Pengaruh Sikap, Norma Subyektif, dan Kon-
trol Keperilakuan terhadap Perilaku Kepatu-
han Wajib Pajak Restoran di Surabaya‟, Jurnal
Akuntansi, Vol. 5 (1), pp. 59-74.
Elia Mustikasari, 2007, „Kajian Empiris tentang Ke-
patuhan Wajib Pajak Badan di Perusahaan In-
dustri Pengolahan di Surabaya‟, Simposium Na-
sional Akuntansi 10, 26-28 July 2007.
Fatih, Osman and Eren, 2011, „Tax Amnesty with
Effects and Effecting Aspects: Tax Compliance,
Tax Audits, and Enforcements Around; The
Turkish Case‟, Journal of Business and Social
Science, Vol. 2 (7).
Feld, Lars P and Frey, Bruno S 2007, „Tax Com-
pliance as the Result of a Psychological Tax
93
Contract: The Role of Incentives and Respon-
sives Regulation‟, Law and Policy Journal, Vol.
29 (1).
Fisher, Ronald C Godderis, John H and Young,
James C 1989, „Participation in Tax Amnesties:
The Individual Income Tax‟, National Tax Jour-
nal, Vol. 42 (1), pp. 15-27.
Ghozali and Latan, Hengky, 2015, Partial Least
Square: Konsep, Teknik, dan Aplikasi, Semarang:
Undip.
Ghozali and Latan, Hengky, 2012, Membuat Skripsi,
Thesis, dan Disertasi dengan PLS-SEM, Sema-
rang: Undip.
Ghozali and Latan, Hengky, 2011, Aplikasi Analisis
Multivariate dengan Program SPSS 20, Sema-
rang: Undip.
Ghozali and Latan, Hengky, 2011, Model Persamaan
Struktural: Konsep dan Aplikasi dengan Program
Amos 22.0, Semarang: Undip.
Hair, Joseph, 2010, Multivariate Data Analysis, Se-
venth Edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hal Inter-
national Inc.
Iiker Ugulu, 2013, „Confirmatory Factor Analysis
for Testing Validity and Reliability of Tradi-
tional Knowledge Scale to Measure University
Students‟ Attitudes‟, Academic Journal, Vol. 81
(16), pp. 1399-1408.
James McKee, Michael and Beck, William, 1990,
„Amazing Grace: Tax Amnesties and Com-
pliance‟, National Tax Journal, Vol. 43(1), pp. 23-
37.
James Vazquez, Jorge Martinas and Wallace, Sally,
2009, „Do Tax Amnesties Work? The Revenue
Effects of Tax Amnesties during the Transition
in the Russian Federation‟, Economic Policy and
Policy, Vol. 39 (2), pp. 235-253.
Koch, Christian, Muller, and Cornelius, 2015, „An-
ticipated Tax Amnesties and Tax Compliance:
An Experimental Study, Tax Experiments,
V1(15), pp. 1-27.
Mazur, Mark J and Brown, Robert E 2003, „IRS‟s
Comprehensive Approach to Compliance
Measurement‟, Economic Research.
Mehmet Nar, 2015, „The Effect of Behavioral Eco-
nomics on Tax Amnesty‟, International Journal
of Economics and Financial Issues, Vol. 5 (2), pp.
580-589.
Millan JH 2008, Educational Research, Pearson Edu-
cation, Inc.
Ngadiman and Daniel Huslin, 2015, „Pengaruh
Sunset Policy, Tax Amnesty, dan Saksi Pajak
Terhadap Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak‟, Jurnal
Akuntansi, Vol. 19, pp. 225-241.
Nurul Hasanah Uswati Dewi and Titik Prihatin,

2010, „Predicting intended ethical behavior of
auditor candidates on accounting students‟,
The 18th Annual Conference on Pacific Basin
Finance, Economic Accounting and Management
(PBFEAM).
Ravand and Baghaei, 2016, Partial Least Square Equ-
ation Modelling with R‟, Practical Assessment, Re-
search, and Evaluation, Vol. 21, pp. 1-16.
Siti Resmi, 2016, Perpajakan Teori dan Kasus, Jakarta:
Salemba Empat.
Undang-Undang No. 17 tahun 2016, Tax Amnesty.
Wenzel, Michael, 2004, „An Analysis of Norm
94
Agnes Findia Novianti: An investigation of the Theory …
Processes in Tax Compliance‟, Journal of Eco-
nomic Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 213-228.
Widi and Hidayat, Argo Adhi, 2010, „Studi Empiris
Theory Planned Behavior dan Pengaruh Kewa-
jiban Moral pada Perilaku Ketidakpatuhan
Wajib Pajak Orang Pribadi‟, Jurnal Akuntansi
dan Keuangan, Vol. 12(2), pp. 82-93.
Widi Dwi and Purnomosidhi, Bambang, 2015,
„Pengaruh Sikap, Norma Subjektif, Kontrol Pe-
rilaku yang Dipersepsikan, dan Sunset Policy
terhadap Kepatuhan Wajib Pajak dengan Niat
sebagai Variabel Intervening, Jurnal Akuntansi.